Replies

I shall defer to whatever issue you think IS the best reason to reject his RINO-ness.

His endorsement of full-fledged "gays in the military" and Kennedy's federal "sexual orientation" legislation and homosexual Scoutmasters tops the list for me, right up there with his promotion of abortion on demand.

The last message in the world we want to send to FUTURE presidential aspirants is this:

You can spend your entire political career attacking conservative values and giving aid and comfort to the opposition, but so long as when it's time to run for president, you claim you've ever so sincerely (and conveniently) seen the light, all us social conservatives will drink that Kool-Aid and go charging to the ramparts on your behalf.

Nada. And Mitt is the perfect object lesson.

The message instead is this:

If you expect our support four or eight or twelve years from now, you better be standing up for life and traditional family values and gun rights NOW.

The last message in the world we want to send to FUTURE presidential aspirants is this:

You can spend your entire political career attacking conservative values and giving aid and comfort to the opposition, but so long as when it's time to run for president, you claim you've ever so sincerely (and conveniently) seen the light, all us social conservatives will drink that Kool-Aid and go charging to the ramparts on your behalf.

Nada. And Mitt is the perfect object lesson.

The message instead is this:

If you expect our support four or eight or twelve years from now, you better be standing up for life and traditional family values and gun rights NOW.

BRAVO. Well said.

While it is certainly a welcome development when ANY person (candidate or non-candidate) comes around to the pro-life position, in Mitt's case, the uncomfortable question must be asked:

"Were you brainwashed THEN, or are you brainwashed NOW?"

[like your Dad claimed to be in 1967?]